The media loves to point out the stupid things that Republicans say … and, being politicians, they do say their share of stupid things.

But if you depend on the mainstream media for your news, then you might think that Democrats are all genius-level intellects whose every word is cherished wisdom designed to send thrills down Chris Matthew’s leg.

But let me assure you that nothing could be further from the truth. And this is particularly true when Democrats attempt to talk credibly about the firearms that they want so desperately to ban and the constitutional right to keep and bear arms that they wish to destroy.

I thought it would be illustrative to share a few of the more frighteningly egregious comments that Democrats have made.

Current ATF regulations require individual applicants to get sign-off from their local chief law-enforcment officer (CLEO). This is known colloquially as the ‘CLEO Sign-off.’

In many jurisdictions, the CLEO will not sign the form and this acts as an effective ban on the acquisition in defiance of the intent of the National Firearms Act (NFA).

This is one of the reason that many people turn to NFA trusts. Trust applicants as well as other non-individual applicants such as corporate entities do not need CLEO Sign-off and this allows those in jurisdictions where the CLEO is anti-gun to still purchase NFA items.

Additionally, under current ATF regulations, trust applicants do not need to be fingerprinted nor do they need to submit photographs.

The ATF however has proposed a rule change that they say would do three things:

I want to tell you about a wonderful family event that took place in Brookville Pennsylvania yesterday.

It was called the Brookville Open Carry Walk and so many people showed up despite the cold that the police and fire department had to stop traffic for a time.

Notably absent were any counter protestors. Despite calls by the anti-gun group CeaseFirePA, not a single counter protestor showed up. I guess CeaseFirePA’s 7 members were busy elsewhere.

According to event organizers Adam Smith and Angel Yount-Smith, the purpose of the event was to show that the media-backed stereotypes about gun owners are not correct. And I have to say “mission accomplished!”

Last Monday a “divided Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday narrowly approved a Democratic bill expanding required federal background checks for nearly all gun [transfers and not just] purchases . . . by 10-8, supported by all Democrats and opposed by every Republican.” But now a broad coalition of 37 gun rights groups from across the United States has stood up to stop the bill.

Calling themselves the Coalition Against Universal Background Checks, these groups, normally focused on state legislation and elections, are poised to enter the fray with all their “grass roots” blazing to stop what they view as a “prior restraint” which will: destroy gun shows, and cost gun owners over $1.04 billion per year.

In an effort to make a political point about concealed carry in public buildings, a Kansas Democrat has inadvertently introduced a bill that makes open carry legal in the state capitol.

The bill was introduced by Lawrence Kansas Democrat John Wilson who states that he is, in fact, opposed to guns in public buildings and only introduced the bill to “draw attention to what he considered the hypocrisy of legislators who wanted to allow the concealed carry of weapons in other public buildings, including schools and mental health centers, but not in their own workplace.”

He went on to add this his actual intent was “to allow concealed carry in the Capitol, and only the Capitol and only concealed. That’s what the amendment I drafted did — or so I thought.”

As if same-sex couples were not faced with enough social and legal bigotry, the so-called ‘Universal Background Check’ bill being pushed by Democrats adds the threat of being made a felon for simply going on a long business trip.

“What?” I hear you cry. “How is that possible?”

The answer is simple. It is possible because the bill is not what it appears to be. Contrary to the rhetoric being mimicked by the media, it is far more than a mere extension of background checks to private sales.

The bill being pushed by Democrats requires background checks and documentation for all ‘transfers’ of firearms, not merely sales. And they define ‘transfers’ expansively to include practically any situation in which a firearm might be out of your control, even for a second.

I should start by admitting that I am a huge fan of The Walking Dead. Every Sunday night, my wife and I watch it like clockwork.

Having said that, I was disappointed last night when the dialogue revealed that, while the show may be set in Georgia, the new episode writers almost certainly come from either New York or Chicago.

How do I know this? Because on last night’s episode, when Rick was searching his former town for weapons, he makes the comment that some business owners kept guns under the counter. He goes on to note that he knows this because he “signed the permits” himself …

Deputy Andy Cox of the Citrus County Sheriff’s Department in Florida is untouchable.

That’s the news from the department today after they wrapped up an internal affairs investigation of the 2009 arrest of a permit holder for open carry after his firearm became inadvertently exposed during a traffic stop.

During the arrest, the officer repeatedly curses the man and threatens to kill him.

Citrus County Sheriff Jeffrey Dawsy says the investigation concluded that Deputy Cox was guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer but he cannot be disciplined because the investigation did not commence within the time frame allowed by law.

The Sheriff himself appears culpable in allowing this to happen since the department admits that the man arrested requested such an investigation immediately following the incident.

However, as is often the case with police misconduct, nothing happened until a video of the arrest surfaced and went viral on the internet.

The sheriff is promising that Cox and all members of the department will be retrained on how to deal with such situations more professionally in the future.

One has to wonder if that means not threatening to kill law-abiding citizens or not getting caught when doing so.

In the meantime, the victim is filing a civil rights lawsuit against the department. We wish him good luck!